Re: fsutil ideas
От | Jim C. Nasby |
---|---|
Тема | Re: fsutil ideas |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20060224070407.GY2068@pervasive.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: fsutil ideas (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: fsutil ideas
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 11:32:05PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote: > Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com> writes: > > Do we actually need this functionality inside the > > DBMS in the first place? > > I think that is the $64 question. My immediate instinct is "no". > See the knock-down-drag-out fights we had last summer about whether > to expose any filesystem access in built-in standard functions at all. > There will be what the Supreme Court would call "strict scrutiny" > concerning the need for this, possible security risks, etc. Isn't this something that could be accomplished entirely within a function? I suppose it might have to be an untrusted language, but that still seems cleaner than putting it in the backend. Plus, ISTM that something like perl is more likely to have a cross-platform means of accomplishing this. -- Jim C. Nasby, Sr. Engineering Consultant jnasby@pervasive.com Pervasive Software http://pervasive.com work: 512-231-6117 vcard: http://jim.nasby.net/pervasive.vcf cell: 512-569-9461
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: